Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

[BBB167893]

Maybe she didn't even have a clue what "to molest" really means.

Maybe she did. Maybe she knew all too well.

 

[SheBoss]

also, Im not sure if Im even on the right thread anymore! but...I was not aware that Burke was a bed wetter. I do know that Patsy claimed it was an emotional response to her cancer that jb was wetting the bed as though this is a common occurence in children of cancer patients.

I have never heard of this, but I have heard that sexually abused children are most likely to be bedwetters and that this is one of the first markers that investigators look for in children they suspect are being abused.

I've heard that before, mina. Something about a child will wet the bed trying to make themselves less desirable to the molester. It makes sense to me.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I've heard that before, mina. Something about a child will wet the bed trying to make themselves less desirable to the molester. It makes sense to me.

I have always heard that bed wetting is a warning sign of molestation, but it doesn't necessarily mean a child is being molested. I need to explain. I wet the bed as a young child and it was because I just didn't wake up when I had to go. Two things: 1) It was that way after potty training, I never stopped wetting the bed and then started back. That is the big clue with JonBenet. She was totally potty trained and then started wetting the bed out of the blue. This doesn't just happen unless there is a physical reason and we all know how many times Patsy had JB at the doctor's office.
So, the reason must have been psychological and Patsy may have really believed it was because of her cancer (or she could have been in denial about the molestation). 2) It does run in families. My oldest daughter also wet the bed even after potty training. My guess is it didn't run in the Ramsey/Paugh families or we would have already heard about it. I also had not heard that Burke also wet the bed. If that's true, it opens up a whole new can of worms. IMO

 

[LinasK]

I've heard that before, mina. Something about a child will wet the bed trying to make themselves less desirable to the molester. It makes sense to me.

Along the same lines of a grown woman telling a rapist she's on her period...

 

[SheBoss]

I also had not heard that Burke also wet the bed. If that's true, it opens up a whole new can of worms. IMO

I've heard that several times. I have no idea if he was STILL wetting the bed at the time of the incident, but that he (at one time, at least) was a bed wetter.

 

[slug]

I've heard that several times. I have no idea if he was STILL wetting the bed at the time of the incident, but that he (at one time, at least) was a bed wetter.

Boys do tend to be wetter at nights longer than girls do but i've never heard of burke being a bed wetter longer than normal.

 

[Bobbarita]

I think given all that we know in this case - even just the basic facts and decisions the Ramseys have made and not made - make it obvious that they are hiding the truth to protect someone.
Now the logical question is WHOM would they spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on to protect - hiring the highest priced and most powerful lawyers in the entire state??? And going so far as to move out of state to distance themselves from the crime and the authorities there?

Who would a mother protect at all costs? Who would a father protect?
Would a savvy woman like Patsy protect her husband if she'd found him molesting his daughter? Protect him to this day? I haven't seen any evidence of that.
John might possibly protect Patsy if she had lashed out in anger at JonBenet and inadvertantly killed her and then covered it up - given Patsy's ordeal with cancer etc. But I really doubt it with John's extreme grief over having already lost one daughter.

The most likely scenario that fits all the facts we know to date is that Burke accidentally killed his sister and his mother frantically staged the scene and covered it up. Whether John was in on this or not is unclear.
All of their actions, behaviors and decisions make sense when considering this scenario.
Not to mention John's terse voice aimed at Burke that morning, "We weren't speaking to YOU!"
Then shuffling him off and away from them.
And not bothering to rush to him once John "discovered" the dead body, but going instead to the Fernie's home leaving Burke vulnerable to this "foreign faction" that they now KNOW will kill a child. This is what they HAD to have still believed at that point.
Yet they left Burke for hours before reuniting with him. Absolutely no fear.
And when they told him JonBenet was dead - he simply 'nodded his head' and ran off to play!
3 weeks shy of 10 yrs old. This is NOT how a ten year old boy whom they claimed "loved his sister" would react!! No questions asked about what happened, how did she die?, will they come get me now? Nothing.
Indifferent.
Just like the psychologist said. His "lack of affect" was pronounced.
And the cover-up continues.......IMO

I have followed the case for years but I have just found Websleuths!
I TOTALLY agree with your theory and have always believed Burke did it. I am a psychatric professional. Burke's behavior is the giveaway. You are spot on with your observations!

 

[joeskidbeck]

I have followed the case for years but I have just found Websleuths!
I TOTALLY agree with your theory and have always believed Burke did it. I am a psychatric professional. Burke's behavior is the giveaway. You are spot on with your observations!

Welcome to Websleuths and the JonBenet forum, Bobbarita!

 

[my_tee_mouse]

http://aacap.org/page.ww?name=Bedwetting&section=Facts+for+Families

http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=1485

http://www.nctsnet.org/nctsn_assets/pdfs/caring/intrafamilialabuse.pdf

 

[Bobbarita]

Welcome to Websleuths and the JonBenet forum, Bobbarita!

Thanks. Websleuths is great! I have a friend who has been following the Caylee Anthony case and she'll be joining too.

 

[DeeDee249]

I've heard that several times. I have no idea if he was STILL wetting the bed at the time of the incident, but that he (at one time, at least) was a bed wetter.

We don't know what age he wet the bed till, but a housekeeper (it may have been the one before LHP, not sure) said he did wet the bed.
Kids wet the bed for various reasons. Some are simply young, they can stay dry when the are awake, but don't have enough control over a full bladder to awaken and go to potty. Some kids wake up but are too scared to go potty at night. My grandson stayed dry all night as soon as he was trained, age 2 1/2. But some kids take longer. Some are deep sleepers, and simply don't feel when they have to go.
But one thing is pretty much well-known among professionals. That when a dry child begins to wet again after being dry for over a YEAR (as was the case with JB), something else is going on with the child. And JB didn't just WET the bed, she soiled the bed, too, and even worse, she wet and soiled when she was awake- this after being completely trained at age 3. It's the "awake" part that raises an even bigger flag to me. That can't be blamed on deep sleeping, being afraid to get out of bed at night. That is something else entirely.

 

[tragco]

I have always heard that bed wetting is a warning sign of molestation, but it doesn't necessarily mean a child is being molested. I need to explain. I wet the bed as a young child and it was because I just didn't wake up when I had to go. Two things: 1) It was that way after potty training, I never stopped wetting the bed and then started back. That is the big clue with JonBenet. She was totally potty trained and then started wetting the bed out of the blue. This doesn't just happen unless there is a physical reason and we all know how many times Patsy had JB at the doctor's office.
So, the reason must have been psychological and Patsy may have really believed it was because of her cancer (or she could have been in denial about the molestation). 2) It does run in families. My oldest daughter also wet the bed even after potty training. My guess is it didn't run in the Ramsey/Paugh families or we would have already heard about it. I also had not heard that Burke also wet the bed. If that's true, it opens up a whole new can of worms. IMO

Not only was she wetting the bed, my understanding is she was also fecally incontinent at bedtime. I could be wrong-maybe she was just not wiping herself afterwards? All her panties were stained with feces according to an interview I am too tired to look up and link to right now (but I will later if someone insists).

Surely at that age that type of bedtime incontinence is extremely rare, if it did occur? Surely she was capable and would have wanted to wipe herself off, unless it was a deterrent for something else. That, even more than the bedwetting, is telling to me that something bad was happening. IMO. I am no doctor or child psychologist.

ETA: I read on further down after my post. DeeDee beat me to it. I'm glad I am not the only one who finds this very, very strange.

 

[tragco]

Is it safe to say then that either the person was not strong enough to make this a "a blow to kill"? Or that it was a blow to knock her unconscious?

This did not cause her death. Thank you.

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words.

I was able to find the picture through this site, which is a really detailed source of information:

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/Head%20Injuries

This is the picture, but think about it before viewing. It made me cry, but it also gave me insight into the head injury that no words could:

****WARNING: LINK BELOW IS VERY GRAPHIC****
http://www.jameson245.com/redskull.jpg
****WARNING: LINK ABOVE IS VERY GRAPHIC****

 

[joeskidbeck]

Not only was she wetting the bed, my understanding is she was also fecally incontinent at bedtime. I could be wrong-maybe she was just not wiping herself afterwards? All her panties were stained with feces according to an interview I am too tired to look up and link to right now (but I will later if someone insists).

Surely at that age that type of bedtime incontinence is extremely rare, if it did occur? Surely she was capable and would have wanted to wipe herself off, unless it was a deterrent for something else. That, even more than the bedwetting, is telling to me that something bad was happening. IMO. I am no doctor or child psychologist.

ETA: I read on further down after my post. DeeDee beat me to it. I'm glad I am not the only one who finds this very, very strange.

For me there is enough evidence of molestation in her toileting issues alone to warrant further investigation. It's been reported that JonBenet needed help wiping herself and would ask anyone available to help. That's not good whether or not she was being molested.

 

[DeeDee249]

Anyone who has read the autopsy report (and everyone studying this case should read it), you will see that the coroner could not decide which of the two causes of death came first, strangulation or head blow, but BOTH were listed as causes of death and EITHER could have killed her independent of the other. No one who has actually looked at that poor, cracked skull should be able to say that it didn't kill her. It may not have been the only thing (as pressure from the ligature on the vagus nerve would have stopped her heart anyway), but she would have died from that head blow.

 

[LinasK]

Anyone who has read the autopsy report (and everyone studying this case should read it), you will see that the coroner could not decide which of the two causes of death came first, strangulation or head blow, but BOTH were listed as causes of death and EITHER could have killed her independent of the other. No one who has actually looked at that poor, cracked skull should be able to say that it didn't kill her. It may not have been the only thing (as pressure from the ligature on the vagus nerve would have stopped her heart anyway), but she would have died from that head blow.

I was just thinking about this again the other night, and it occurred to me that if the head blow came first, wouldn't there be tons of blood spatter? So therefore, I'm thinking the strangulation came first, which may have been part of the sexual abuse anyway...

 

[Bobbarita]

I was just thinking about this again the other night, and it occurred to me that if the head blow came first, wouldn't there be tons of blood spatter? So therefore, I'm thinking the strangulation came first, which may have been part of the sexual abuse anyway...

It was a closed (depressed) fracture so there would not have been tons of blood.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I believe that she was rendered brain dead after the head blow, which means she was still barely breathing, but alive. Anyone who has ever seen someone who was brain dead knows that by the look (or no look) in their eyes, they appear to be very dead. It's a terrible sight and I believe they thought she was already dead and did the ligature to make it appear that she had died that way. I agree with those who think the R's didn't realize the head injury would ever be found since it didn't bleed. Even if neither of the parents administered the head blow, the strangulation would have made them the murderer. I wonder if they had known she was still alive, would they have called 911 after all or knowing what her life would have been if she had been saved, would they still have strangled her? This is all my opinion, of course.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I may be very naive, but I don't think anyone in the house would have been playing sex games that included strangulation with JonBenet. Molesting her, yes, but not those type of games.

 

[madeleine]

I believe that she was rendered brain dead after the head blow, which means she was still barely breathing, but alive. Anyone who has ever seen someone who was brain dead knows that by the look (or no look) in their eyes, they appear to be very dead. It's a terrible sight and I believe they thought she was already dead and did the ligature to make it appear that she had died that way. I agree with those who think the R's didn't realize the head injury would ever be found since it didn't bleed. Even if neither of the parents administered the head blow, the strangulation would have made them the murderer. I wonder if they had known she was still alive, would they have called 911 after all or knowing what her life would have been if she had been saved, would they still have strangled her? This is all my opinion, of course.

To me the evidence says she was alive when strangled and alive when sexually assaulted.To me that makes the head blow less significant.What I mean is,it didn't start with an accidental head blow followed by such a cruel,unnecessary staging (strangulation and assault,and she was still alive,hard to believe they didn't notice,I mean it takes some time to make that garrote,to put it around her neck,pull,to put a glove on and insert a finger in her vagina,etc).

I still don't know what it was re the garrote,sex game or finishing her off but IMO one of the two.